Search

Abstract Background Detecting, treating and monitoring anaemia has a functional, social and economic impact on patients’ quality of life and the health system, since inadequate monitoring can lead to more accident & emergency visits and hospitalizations. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact in the patient clinical outcomes of using haemoglobinometry to early detect anaemia in patients with chronic anaemia in primary care. Methods Randomized controlled trial Capillary haemoglobin will be measured using a haemoglobinometer on a monthly basis in the intervention group. In the control group, the protocol currently in force at the primary care centre will be followed and venous haemoglobin will be measured. Any cases of anaemia detected in either group will be referred to the transfusion circuit of the reference hospital. Discusion The results will shed light on the impact of the intervention on the volume of hospitalizations and accident & emergency (A&E) visits due to anaemia, as well as patients’ quality of life. Chronic and repeated bouts of anaemia are detected late, thus leading to decompensation in chronic diseases and, in turn, more A&E visits and hospitalizations. The intervention should improve these outcomes since treatment could be performed without delay. Improving response times would decrease decompensation in chronic diseases, as well as A&E visits and hospitalizations, and improve quality of life. The primary care nurse case manager will perform the intervention, which should improve existing fragmentation between different care levels. Trial registration NCT04757909. Registered 17 February 2021. Retrospectively registered.

Abstract Background Covid-19 pandemic has particularly affected older people living in Long-term Care settings in terms of infection and mortality. Methods We carried out a cross-sectional analysis within a cohort of Long-term care nursing home residents between March first and June thirty, 2020, who were ≥ 65 years old and on whom at least one PCR test was performed. Socio-demographic, comorbidities, and clinical data were recorded. Facility size and community incidence of SARS-CoV-2 were also considered. The outcomes of interest were infection (PCR positive) and death. Results A total of 8021 residents were included from 168 facilities. Mean age was 86.4 years (SD = 7.4). Women represented 74.1%. SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected in 27.7% of participants, and the overall case fatality rate was 11.3% (24.9% among those with a positive PCR test). Epidemiological factors related to risk of infection were larger facility size (pooled aOR 1.73; P < .001), higher community incidence (pooled aOR 1.67, P = .04), leading to a higher risk than the clinical factor of low level of functional dependence (aOR 1.22, P = .03). Epidemiological risk factors associated with mortality were male gender (aOR 1.75; P < .001), age (pooled aOR 1.16; P < .001), and higher community incidence (pooled aOR 1.19, P = < 0.001) whereas clinical factors were low level of functional dependence (aOR 2.42, P < .001), Complex Chronic Condition (aOR 1.29, P < .001) and dementia (aOR 1.33, P

Abstract Background Use of the video digital format in the classroom is a common way to present clinical cases to stimulate discussion and increase learning. A simulated live performance with actors, also in the classroom, could be an alternative way to present cases that may be more attractive to arouse students’ interest and attention. The aim of the present study was to compare the learning process between a group of students who saw a clinical case as a simulated live scene in the classroom and others seeing the same clinical case projected by video. Method One hundred and thirty-one students (69 from physiotherapy and 62 from medicine) attended an interactive seminar on delirium in older people. Each group was subdivided into two groups: one saw the clinical case as a theatrical performance in the classroom (scene group; n = 68), while the other saw the same case projected on video (video group; n = 63). Before and after attending the seminar, students answered a questionnaire [four questions on theoretical knowledge of delirium (score 0–7) and two on subjective learning perception (linear scale: 0–10) (score 0–20)]. At the end, a further question was included on the usefulness of the scene or a video in the learning process (linear scale: 0–10). Results Students in both groups (live scene and video) significantly improved in all questionnaire scores after the seminar (p = 0.001) with a large Effect Size (ES > 0.80). Students of the scene group obtained higher scores on theoretical delirium knowledge [6.41 ± 0.73 vs 5.93 ± 1.31 (p = 0.05)], subjective learning perception questions (what they thought they knew about delirium) (16.28 ± 3.51 versus 15.92 ± 2.47 (p = 0.072)], and the overall questionnaire (22.45 ± 4.15 versus 21.48 ± 2.94 (p = 0.027)] than the video group. Students of the scene group opined that live scene was very useful for learning with a mean score of 9.04 ± 1.16 (range 0–10), and opinion in the student’s video group scored 8.21 ± 1.22 (p = 0.001). Conclusions All students improved significantly their knowledge but those who saw the theatrical performance obtained slightly better results, which suggest that this form of clinical case presentation in the classroom may be an alternative at least as effective as traditional video projections.